Posted - 04/17/2009 : 11:06:15 Two words on the Chicago Blackhawks game winning goal in OT last night

"GOALTENDER" + "INTERFERENCE"

That was the most blatent case of goaltender interference I have ever seen! Yes he was pushed but that was 8 feet away. He had plenty of time to get out of the way but instead he just glided into kipper and ended up 2 feet in the crease wrapped up in kipper and blocked him from moving. I was shocked that it wasn't called! What a joke!

11 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First)

Guest8458

Posted - 04/18/2009 : 12:34:16 That was not goaltending interferance! I think they should have called it when he was tripped behind the net but not in overtime. Leopold pushed him and it is clearly obvious that the hawk was trying to stop! STOP CRYING FLAMES FANS AND SUPPORT YOUR TEAM SO THEY CAN STOP CHOCKING IN THE POST SEASON!!!!!!!

Guest6051

Posted - 04/18/2009 : 11:33:04 Not only was it interference, if you go back a few games Calgary scored two goals in a game in a row that were taken away, one for a high stick and one for being in the crease, and it was questionable at best.. whats with the in the crease call cause like i said not only was it interference he was behind Kipper when the puck

Guest2192

Posted - 04/18/2009 : 10:28:39 ladd was pushed by leopold, no question about it. and some one of you say he didnt try to get out of the way. take a look at the video again. once he reaches the hash marks he turns around so that he's facing the blue line, at which points leopold contacts him and begins to push him toward kipper. Leopold releases contact as beans said about 1-1.5 feet from the net. How can ladd try to get out of the way of kipper when he is pushed BACKWARDS into him. ladd could not tell exactly how close he was to kipper to get out of the way because he doesnt have eyes in the back of his head. so calgary fans need to stop whining and saying goalie interference cuz it wasnt. and guess what? calgary is my favorite team, but i play by the rules. good, clean chicago goal. hopefully the flames can fight back. (and i cant resist. eazy e with a muthaphukkin haha)

Thrasher

Posted - 04/17/2009 : 16:19:15 I'm definately a Flames fan, and as much as it sucks, that goal is legit. Sucks that such an amazing game had to end so quick, i was so into it, but the goal was called properly.

And besides, it was Calgarys fault anyway, earlier in the play they gave the puck away in the neutral zone, which cost them dearly. Calgary fans need to stop crying about it and get ready for them to win game number 2.

I Promise I didn't give her the STD, I'm not a sharing person.

Guest5702

Posted - 04/17/2009 : 14:13:30 Do you people know anything about hockey? Players have every right to drive to the net. You don't skate to the net, stop 10 feet away and stand there like a 2 dollar hooker...thats just retarded to comment on. If Leopold, first) didn't lose the puck causing the turnover; and second) push Ladd into Kipper, the goal would never had happened. What do you expect players to do when being pushed into the goalie? Say oops sorry it won't happen again? Garbage goal scored on a garbage team...I guess the end justifies the means..

On the youtube link above, stop the video at exactly 10 seconds and tell me how far in front of Kipprusoff the Chicago player is and if the Calgary guy still has contact with his body.

There is not a player alive today that could have stopped in the 12" to 18" of space between Kipper and Chicago player once Leopold broke contact.

And by the way, just because I am an Oiler fan does not mean I automatically hate the Flames. Definately not my favorite team out there, but between Calgary and Chicago, I cheer for Calgary. However, as my team is out, I have more of an ability to be objective over a fan of a specific team.

This call was not goalie interference.

But regardless of what "side" of this arguement one is on, the other feels the call is wrong. If the refs disallow the goal, Chicago fans have a valid arguement that the player was pushed into the crease.

I don't think anyone can win this one, and I would admit I might be wrong. I don't think so, but it might happen. Minimally, I think most or all could agree it's a questionable call either way.

tbar

Posted - 04/17/2009 : 12:50:38 I dont thnk Beans love for the Oilers has anything to do with his description of what happened because I see it the same way. Sure Ladd could maybe have tried harder to stop but why would he? I want Calgary to go all the way but their is no way you can call this one back. He got pushed in to Kipper.

Look at it thi way the ref either has to call a penalty on Chicago or make the call he made. If hecalls a penalty thats the last game he head mans this playffs because Ladd did not go at Kipper on his own he got pushed in. Correct call unfortunatly.

Ripley

Posted - 04/17/2009 : 12:48:04 Got to agree with 8571 about the rule interpretation here. The player could easily have gotten out of the way. The angle in the video above is not the greatest. the camera behind the net shows it the best.

Guest8571

Posted - 04/17/2009 : 12:14:02 actually its goalie intereference if the player does not make an attempt to get out of the way.

beans you let your love for the opilers and hate of the flames get in way of common sense clearly no attempt was made to stop and it should have been a penalty but in saying that i think taht this will motivate the flames to win even more

Beans15

Posted - 04/17/2009 : 11:48:18 Ya, I have to completely disagree. The Calgary player (Leopold I believe) had contact with the Chicago player until he was within a foot of the crease. Not 8 feet away. Secondly, it's not goaltender interference when the offensive player is pushed into the crease by a defensive player.

It was not goaltender interference. Unfortunate for the Flames yes, against any rule, nope.